From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Jason@zx2c4.com Received: from krantz.zx2c4.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by krantz.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id 90553683 for ; Sun, 30 Apr 2017 12:25:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from frisell.zx2c4.com (frisell.zx2c4.com [192.95.5.64]) by krantz.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id d2b6be49 for ; Sun, 30 Apr 2017 12:25:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: by frisell.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id 597c02cb for ; Sun, 30 Apr 2017 12:25:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: by frisell.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTPSA id 4acb471c (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128:NO) for ; Sun, 30 Apr 2017 12:25:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-oi0-f54.google.com with SMTP id x184so66800970oia.1 for ; Sun, 30 Apr 2017 05:35:05 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: From: "Jason A. Donenfeld" Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2017 14:35:04 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: do a client behind NAT needs to define listening port? To: Rostislav Belotserkovski Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: WireGuard mailing list List-Id: Development discussion of WireGuard List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , If you're the client, you're already connecting _up_ to a server, which means ordinary stateful NAT takes care of that. Comparison: do you manually specify a source port when making an outgoing HTTP connection?